The First Impression: Perceptions Based on Social Media

Transcription

1 Western University Brescia Psychology Undergraduate Honours Theses Brescia University College Spring The First Impression: Perceptions Based on Social Media Katrina Lounsbury Brescia University College, Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Social Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Lounsbury, Katrina, "The First Impression: Perceptions Based on Social Media" (2017). Brescia Psychology Undergraduate Honours Theses This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Brescia University College at It has been accepted for inclusion in Brescia Psychology Undergraduate Honours Theses by an authorized administrator of For more information, please contact

2 Running head: SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 1 The First Impression: Perceptions Based on Social Media Postings Katrina Lounsbury Honours Psychology Thesis Department of Psychology Brescia University College London, Ontario, Canada April 2017 Thesis Advisor: Dr. Leslie Janes

3 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 2 Abstract The current study investigated factors (i.e., confidence, gender, attractiveness) influencing participant s perceptions of social media postings. 89 female Psychology 1000 Brescia University College students participated in this study. There were 4 levels of confidence captions: low confidence, average confidence, high confidence, and arrogance. Photos, with captions similar to those that are shown on social media, were of males and females of either low attractiveness, average attractiveness, or high attractiveness. Participants rated favourability and level of confidence of individuals in the captioned photos. Key hypotheses were that arrogant captions would be perceived less favourably by participants than those postings that had lower levels of confidence captions, and that male postings would be perceived more favourably at high levels of confidence than those of females. Although the hypotheses were not confirmed, it was found that confidence level, attractiveness, and gender had some significant effects on perceptions of social media postings. Although these findings were not consistent with previous findings, they may still help provide evidence that this area of research is not yet complete.

4 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 3 The First Impression: Perceptions Based on Social Media Postings The difference between self-confidence and arrogance can be difficult to determine. A thin line exists between where self-confidence ends and arrogance begins, a judgement which is often subjective. The subjectivity of characterizing an individual as either self-confident or arrogant occurs because of the traits varying levels that are found in the general population (Emmons, 1984). For example, someone having high self-confidence may be perceived as arrogant by others because they believe they are highly skilled, which may cause other individuals to believe they are inferior and less skilled. Someone who is considered to be selfconfident is an individual who believes in themselves and their capabilities to succeed (Merriam- Webster Collegiate Dictionary, 2016), whereas someone who is considered arrogant is an individual who believes they are better and more important than others (Davenport, Bergman, Bergman, & Fearrington, 2014). Arrogance is defined by observers who feel some individuals hold excessive self-regard (Lee, Ahn, & Kim, 2014), meaning that the individual holds an inflated amount of self-pride (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008; Campbell & Foster, 2007) often causing them to be considered vain (Workman & Lee, 2011). Narcissism, on the other hand, is a personality trait in which a person has inflated perceptions of him or herself, and who feels entitled in terms of their outcomes. Similar to those individuals considered arrogant, narcissists have excessive self-regard. Typically, this personality characteristic is measured by narcissism scales (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008). In this paper, the terms arrogant and narcissistic are both used, but narcissistic refers to studies that examine an individual s behavior based on their level of narcissism, as measured by a scale, whereas arrogance refers to how individuals perceive others who hold inflated self-regard. Although it

5 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 4 is likely that many narcissists are deemed arrogant by perceivers, it is possible that nonnarcissists are also deemed arrogant by perceivers. Social media has become an increasingly popular way for individuals to portray themselves online because of their control over self-presentation, allowing them to choose their best assets to present the most flattering depiction of themselves (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008). Social media allows the viewing public to form ideas about an individual s attitudes and personality, and whether or not they will be accepting of them (Jackson, 2007). Social media platforms allow users to have full control over how they present themselves (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008). Users typically want to be accepted by people who view them online (Lee, Quigley, Nesler, Corbet, & Tedeschi, 1999), so they often use this platform to strategically portray certain images to receive this social benefit (Kramer & Winter, 2008; Webster, Hoogland, Schurtz, & Smith, 2014). The problem with strategic self-presentation is that it has also been found to be related to vanity and arrogance in Facebook users (Utz, Tanis, & Vermeulen, 2012). This relationship, in turn, allows users who are high in vanity or arrogance to present themselves so others do not perceive them in that way (Utz et al., 2012). Social media users who have a narcissistic personality are motivated to use these platforms strategically, to present themselves in the most positive light possible (Utz et al., 2012). Fortunately, even though this self-presentation is often meticulously planned, user s descriptions of themselves are still often generally accurate (Back et al., 2010). It has been found that the profile picture is an important self-presentation method (Strano, 2008), allowing for self-promotion (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008) and what the social media user determines as their appropriate self-image portrayal, meaning that the user subjectively determines what they believe is an accurate portrayal of themselves to others (Kapidzic, 2013).

6 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 5 Similarly, self-presentation is linked to an individuals self-confidence, socially and physically, because individuals feel more confident in themselves, their bodies, and their interpersonal interactions when they accurately present themselves to others, as they are able to be their true selves (Laghi, Pallini, D Alessio, & Baiocco, 2011). Because many first impressions and judgements are supported by opinions held by the individuals being portrayed, it allows them to compare and relate their own ideas about themselves to how others see them (Laghi et al., 2011). For example, if an individual portrays confidence, allowing others to see them as confident, it will allow them to see themselves as self-confident. It has also been found that individuals who have a narcissistic personality often have more active social network use (Davenport et al., 2014) and attempt to portray a positive public impression (Webster et al., 2014). Narcissism has been found to be positively associated with many aspects of social media network sites narcissistic individuals will often post more selfpromotion information (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008), as well as upload more photos of themselves and more frequently update their statuses (Ong, Ang, Ho, Lim, Goh, Lee, & Chua, 2011). Narcissistic individuals will compensate for any ego threats using self-enhancement bias, whereby they believe that they, personally, are the reason for their own success, as opposed to external sources (McLeod, 2011). If these individuals sense any negativity or threats toward their profiles, they will use this self-enhancement bias to strengthen the positivity they feel about themselves (John & Robins, 1994). Normally, self-enhancement bias is motivating to individuals, as they feel they in control of their success, but it can cause issues when someone is seen as arrogant, because they are already quite egotistical (McLeod, 2011). Narcissistic individuals aim to promote their best selves by selecting their most self-enhancing attributes,

7 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 6 such as physically attractive or provocative photos, to display (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008; Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). Bem (1972) argued that because self- and other-perception are so similar, perceptions are frequently accurate reflections of the individual being perceived. It is rare that individuals will see themselves as better than others perceive them (John & Robins, 1994), which is consistent with social comparison theory, stating that we evaluate ourselves based on what others think of us (Festinger, 1954). However, when observers evaluate someone who is arrogant, because of their excessive self-regard, they are often perceived negatively, overall, even by the individuals who they are trying to impress (Kauten, Lui, Stary, & Barry, 2015; Webster et al., 2014). The content of one s social media posts have been found to be linked with narcissism, and often are correlated with how someone else perceives them (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008). In previous studies, attractiveness, gender, favourability, and self-esteem have all been looked at when examining rater s perceptions of social media postings. Zhang, Kong, Zhong, and Kou s (2014) study found that individuals are viewed positively if they are more attractive. This finding is consistent with what is known as the halo effect, which states that what is beautiful is good (Lucker, Beane, & Helmreich, 1981). From the halo effect, it has been found that if someone is attractive, often that individual would be rated more favourably on other characteristics unrelated to attractiveness, such as social skills, leadership ability, and even intelligence (Lucker et al., 1981; Zhang et al., 2014). When examining gender, females are often perceived more negatively than males (Workman & Lee, 2011). Females are more likely than males to take other-perceptions into account because other-perception is often important to them (Workman & Lee, 2011). Consequently, females frequently worry about how others perceive their attractiveness, so they

8 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 7 tend to pay more attention to how it is being perceived because they fear that they may not be seen as having social value if they are not seen as being attractive (Workman & Lee, 2011). Males, on the other hand, often have higher self-confidence, both physically and socially (Laghi et al., 2011). It has been found that female raters often judged more harshly and rated less favourably those females whom they perceived as being arrogant (Lucker et al., 1981), simply because they felt threatened by them (Kauten et al., 2015). Kauten et al. s (2015) findings relate to Bogart, Benotsch, and Pavlovic s (2004) findings, whereby narcissistic females often exaggerated how favourably they saw themselves. In this research study, when narcissistic females compared themselves to those who they perceived as being lesser than themselves, they felt better about themselves, whereas when they compared themselves to those who are better than them, they were more hostile toward them, seeing them as a threat to their self-worth (Bogart et al., 2004). These findings were consistent with Festinger s (1954) findings for the social comparison hypothesis, which states that feelings of hostility and threat mainly occur when individuals feel threatened by others (Bogart et al., 2004). Individuals presenting themselves often want to be seen as socially desirable, or favourable, when they portray themselves accurately (Laghi et al., 2011). Arrogant raters can perceive arrogant others as either favourable (Campbell, 1999) or as a threat (Bogart et al., 2004), but, overall, arrogant social media postings are frequently rated as less favourable by any rater (Kauten et al., 2015). Favourability has also been found to be negatively related to strategic self-presentation (Utz et al., 2012) which narcissistic social media users frequently engage in. Wanting to be viewed favourably by others is also connected to healthy self-esteem (Raskin & Novacek, 1999), which is how much someone values themselves (Baumeister, Campbell,

9 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 8 Kreuger, & Vohs, 2003) and whether or not an individual believes they are good enough (Rosenberg, 1965). In the current study, three factors were examined: gender, confidence, and attractiveness, to assess their impact on perceivers ratings of favorability. In this study, female participants were asked to rate captioned photos, similar to what one might see on social media, to assess how their ratings of favourability varied between gender (i.e., male and female) attractiveness (i.e., low, average, and high) and confidence (i.e., low, average, high, and arrogant) of individuals in the profile photos. Additionally, participants were asked to assess how confident the individuals in the captioned photos were, with assessments ranging from not confident to arrogant. Participants self-esteem was also assessed, due to the fact that it could influence their judgements of other people. Although self-esteem is connected to how individuals view themselves, it may also affect how they view others (Raskin & Novacek, 1999). The current research breaks new ground from previous research in this area. An experimental methodology was used by using various fictitious male and female profile pictures with captions ranging from low confidence to arrogance, whereby, previously, other researchers did correlational research (e.g., Kauten et al., 2015) examining actual social media profile content. As well, participant self-esteem being taken into account differs from previous studies, in that what is of interest is not whether they value themselves, but whether their value of themselves affects their view of others. In terms of favourability ratings, it was expected that captioned photos of people whose captions were arrogant, whether male or female, would be rated less favourably than those in all of the other confidence levels. It was also expected that favourability ratings would higher at moderate or high levels than at low levels of confidence. However, that prediction may be

10 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 9 moderated the participant s level of self-esteem. Thus, self-esteem of participants was included as an exploratory variable, to assess whether it had an impact on ratings of favourablity or arrogance of the target subjects. It was also predicted that that females would be perceived less favourably than males, particularly in the arrogant condition, and would be more likely than males to be rated as arrogant for high confidence captions with their photos, because they would be judged more harshly than males despite having the same photo caption. It was also hypothesized that individuals who were attractive would be rated less favourably and as more arrogant by participants than individuals who were less attractive if their captions were arrogant. However, due to the halo effect (Lucker et al., 1981), it was predicted that attractive individuals would be perceived more favourably, overall, than non-attractive individuals. Method Participants Participants were 89 female Brescia University College Psychology 1000 undergraduate students. Participants were recruited using the Brescia Psychology Research Participation System. Participants had an average age of 18.1 years, with a standard deviation of 0.81 years (range: 17 to 20 years). Compensation was given in the form of one credit for participation. Materials Rosenberg self-esteem scale. This was a 10-item self-report survey, where participants were able to rate their self-worth from strongly agreeing to strongly disagreeing with statements given (Rosenthal, 2005). Half of the items were worded positively, and the other half of the items were worded negatively, which were reverse scored. The scores range from 0 to 30.

11 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 10 Photos. Six photos were administered to each participant to rate the level of favourability, confidence and attractiveness. There were three male photos (Braun, Gruendl, Marberger, & Scherber, 2001b; DeBruine & Jones, 2010b; Tempesta, 2016a) and three female photos (Braun et al., 2001a; DeBruine & Jones, 2010a; Tempesta, 2016b), each ranging from low, average, and high attractiveness. Captions. One of either low confidence, average confidence, high confidence, and arrogance captions were randomly attached to the photos (Appendix A). There were four different captions each for low confidence, average confidence, high confidence, and arrogance. Rating scales. Six rating scales were administered for each participant to rate on a scale of 1 to 5 how favourably they viewed the individual in the photo, the attractiveness level of the individual in the photo, and the level of confidence of the individual (Appendix B). For favourability, participants rated on a scale from: how favourable they viewed the individual, from extremely favourably to extremely unfavourably; whether they would like to meet the individual, from strongly agree to strongly disagree; and whether they would like to be the individual s friend, from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Scores could range from 3 to 15. For confidence level, participants could rate: the level of self-confidence the statement showed the individual in the photo had, from extremely low to arrogant; and how socially well-adjusted they saw the individual to be, from extremely well to extremely poorly adjusted. Scores could range from 2 to 10. Finally, for attractiveness, participants could rate the level of attractiveness of the individual from extremely low to extremely high, and scores could range from 1 to 5. Procedure Participants were given the opportunity to register for any of the studies displayed on SONA. Once participants registered for the current study, they were asked to meet at the front of

12 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 11 Ursuline Hall to be taken one of two of the Psychology Undergraduate Research Laboratories. Participants were given a letter of information and signed the provided informed consent, in order to ensure their understanding of the study. Participants then received the Rosenberg Self- Esteem Scale which directed them to rate their agreement or disagreement with each statement. Once completed, participants were shown six photos, three males at each level of attractiveness, and three females at each level of attractiveness, which were randomly assigned to one of four confidence levels captions: low confidence, average confidence, high confidence, or arrogance. 22 women were in the low confidence caption group, 22 women were in the average confidence caption group, 23 women were in the high confidence caption group, and 22 women were in the arrogant caption group, totaling 89 participants. Participants were shown the appropriate photos and captions for their assigned group. Participants were told to complete one questionnaire per photo shown, which allowed them to rate the favourability and attractiveness of the individual in the photo, and the confidence level of the caption shown. Each confidence level group saw the same six photos, with differing captions according to their assigned group. When participants completed all six questionnaires for each of the six photos, they were given debriefing information, thanked for their participation, and compensated accordingly. Results In order to confirm that the confidence captions predicted preferred confidence ratings, a correlational analysis was conducted, and was found to be a significant, positive, moderate correlation, r(87) =.56, p <.001 (see Figure 1). A linear regression analysis showed that 30% of the variance of confidence caption was accounted for by confidence ratings, R 2 =.30, F(1, 87) = 36.79, p <.001.

13 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 12 A chi-square test for independence was conducted in order to be able to examine specific aspects within each variable, but was not found to be significant, χ 2 (3) = 0.01, p >.1. In order to still be able to investigate the specifics within each variable measured, correlational tests were conducted. Confidence ratings ranged from 3.00 to 9.67, out of a total possible rating score of 10 (M = 7.18, SD = 1.50) and favourability ratings ranged from 5.00 to 13.67, out of a total possible rating score of 15 (M = 10.09, SD = 1.35). Average attractive female confidence and favourability ratings showed a significant, positive, weak correlation, r(87) =.31, p =.003 (see Figure 2), and highly attractive female confidence and favourability ratings showed a significant, positive, weak correlation, r(87) =.22, p =.04 (see Figure 3; see Table 1). Unattractive male confidence and favourability ratings showed a significant, positive, weak correlation, r(87) =.29, p =.01 (see Figure 4), average attractive male confidence and favourability ratings showed a significant, positive, weak correlation, r(87) =.39, p <.001 (see Figure 5), and highly attractive male confidence and favourability ratings showed a significant, positive, weak correlation, r(87) =.24, p =.02 (see Figure 6). A linear regression analysis showed that 12% of the variance in confidence ratings was accounted for by favourability ratings, R 2 =.12, F(1, 87) = 12.29, p =.001. Attractiveness ratings ranged from 2.67 to 4.34, out of a total possible rating score of 5 (M = 3.75, SD = 0.60). Unattractive male attractiveness and confidence ratings showed a significant, positive, weak correlation, r(87) =.22, p =.04 (see Figure 7), and average attractive female attractiveness and confidence ratings showed a significant, positive, weak correlation, r(87) =.34, p =.001 (see Figure 8; see Table 2). A linear regression analysis showed that 3% of

14 Confidence Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.73x R² = Confidence Caption Level Figure 1. Scatterplot between confidence caption levels predicting confidence ratings.

15 Favourability Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.30x R² = Confidence Ratings Figure 2. Scatterplot between average attractive female confidence ratings predicting average attractive female favourability ratings.

16 Favourability Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.28x R² = Confidence Ratings Figure 3. Scatterplot between highly attractive female confidence ratings predicting highly attractive female favourability ratings.

17 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 16 Table 1 Confidence and Favourability Rating Correlations Attractiveness Level Male Female Unattractive.29**.20 Average Attraction.39**.31** High Attraction.24*.22* Note. One asterisk (*) denotes p <.05, and two asterisks (**) denotes p <.01.

18 Fvourability Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.32x R² = Confidence Ratings Figure 4. Scatterplot between unattractive male confidence ratings predicting unattractive male favourability ratings.

19 Favourability Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.43x R² = Confidence Ratings Figure 5. Scatterplot between average attractive male confidence ratings predicting average attractive male favourability ratings.

20 Favourability Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.29x R² = Confidence Ratings Figure 6. Scatterplot between highly attractive male confidence ratings predicting highly attractive male favourability ratings.

21 Confidence Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.68x R² = Attractiveness Ratings Figure 7. Scatterplot between unattractive male attractiveness ratings predicting unattractive male confidence ratings.

22 Confidence Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.92x R² = Attractive Ratings Figure 8. Scatterplot between average attractive female attractiveness ratings predicting average attractive female confidence ratings.

23 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 22 Table 2 Confidence and Attractiveness Rating Correlations Attractiveness Level Male Female Unattractive.22*.15 Average Attraction.19.34** High Attraction Note. One asterisk (*) denotes p <.05, and two asterisks (**) denotes p <.01.

24 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 23 the variance in attractiveness ratings was accounted for by confidence ratings, R 2 =.03, F(1, 87) = 2.52, p =.12. The scores of participant self-esteem ranged from 8 to 30, out of a total possible score of 30 (M = 19.33, SD = 4.35). Levels of participant self-esteem and ratings of confidence did not show a significant correlation, r(87) =.01, p =.95 (see Table 3). Both confidence ratings of males (M = 7.30, SD = 1.53) and females (M = 7.01, SD = 1.53) ranged from 3.00 to 9.67, both out of a total possible rating score of 10. Unattractive male and female confidence ratings showed a significant, positive, strong correlation, r(87) =.81, p <.001 (see Figure 9), average attractive male and female confidence ratings showed a significant, positive, strong correlation, r(87) =.79, p <.001 (see Figure 10), and highly attractive male and female confidence ratings showed a significant, positive, strong correlation, r(87) =.89, p <.001 (see Figure 11; see Table 4). Discussion The current study examined the effects of certain factors (i.e., confidence, gender and attractiveness) on first impressions of social media postings. Participants viewed captioned photos which varied in confidence level, gender, and attractiveness, and were asked to evaluate the photo on a number of dimensions with favourability and confidence being the most important. In terms of favourability, it was predicted that captioned photos that had arrogant captions would be rated least favourably by participants compared to other confidence levels. However, it was found that favourability and confidence ratings increased together. These findings differed from previous findings, as it was previously found that the more arrogant someone was perceived, the less favourably they were rated (Kauten et al., 2015).

25 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 24 Table 3 Participant Self-Esteem Score and Confidence Rating Correlations Attractiveness Level Male Female Unattractive Average Attraction High Attraction Note. One asterisk (*) denotes p <.05, and two asterisks (**) denotes p <.01

26 Male Confidence Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.76x R² = Female Confidence Ratings Figure 9. Scatterplot between unattractive male confidence ratings and unattractive female confidence ratings.

27 Male Confidence Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.75x R² = Female Confidence Ratings Figure 10. Scatterplot between average attractive male confidence ratings and average attractive female confidence ratings.

28 Male Confidence Ratings SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS y = 0.94x R² = Female Confidence Ratings Figure 11. Scatterplot between highly attractive male confidence ratings and highly attractive female confidence ratings.

29 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 28 Table 4 Male and Female Confidence Rating Correlations Attractiveness Level Unattractive.81** Average Attraction.79** High Attraction.89** Note. One asterisk (*) denotes p <.05, and two asterisks (**) denotes p <.01

30 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 29 For the gender factor, it was predicted that females would be perceived as arrogant at lower levels of confidence, compared to males. Findings did not support this hypothesis. In the current study, females and males were perceived similarly despite their confidence levels. At each level of confidence, males and females were regarded equally favourably. However, there were some differences between men and women regarding interactions of attractiveness and confidence, although these differences are difficult to interpret. For the attractiveness factor, it was predicted that those who were perceived to be highly attractive would also be rated as more arrogant, particularly at high levels of confidence. Oddly enough, the findings in the current study also differed from what was hypothesized. It was found that as confidence ratings increased, attractiveness ratings stayed positive, but for males, the relationship weakened and was strongest at the male unattractive level, and for females, the relationship strengthened at the average attractiveness level, but then weakened again for the highly attractiveness level. In previous studies, evidence of the halo effect took place (Lucker et al., 1981), whereby individuals rated as attractive were seen as good (Zhang et al., 2014), and so were rated with higher confidence than those who were rated as not as attractive. For the participant self-esteem factor, it was predicted that participants with lower selfesteem would rate photo captions more harshly; the findings indicated that there was no effect on how the individuals rated confidence of others from participant self-esteem. When examining previous studies similar to the current study, and the aspect of self-esteem, researchers have always examined the self-esteem of the individual who is rating their own social media profile (Raskin & Novacek, 1999). Previously, self-esteem has been found to affect how the individual rates their own profile (Raskin & Novacek, 1999). The current study s aim with the factor of self-esteem was to see whether self-esteem of an individual would affect their ratings of others. It

31 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 30 was believed that participants whose self-esteem was not as high may be jealous of others who seemed to portray higher self-esteem, or for participants whose self-esteem was very high, may be harsher on others who seemed to portray lower self-esteem. It was interesting to find that participant self-esteem is not related ratings of confidence, which suggests that the way an individual values themselves does not change how they will perceive others. Although some interesting results were found in the current study, there were limitations that may have influenced the findings. The main limitation was that there were no male participants in the study. Results may have been different if males were also rating the same photos and captions. It is possible that a sex difference might have been found regarding the importance of confidence, gender, and attractiveness in terms of how favourably social media posts are perceived if males had participated. This change would be an interesting aspect to explore in future research. Another limitation regards attitudes in participants about definitions of attractiveness and confidence. Although the photos and captions in the current study were pretested for perceptions of attractiveness and confidence level, people vary in their perceptions. In the current study, each participant would have had a different definition of confidence and arrogance, meaning that the way they rated the photos and captions may not be exactly as how they were meant to be rated. For example, a caption that was categorized as arrogant may have been perceived by participants as high confidence. As well, each participant would have their own particular ideal of attractive people, and the photos chosen, although considered ideal, may not have matched what the participant would choose, leading them to rate the photo as lower or higher in attractiveness than what it was meant to be. Overall, although similar studies have been conducted, it is important in the future to more thoroughly explore how different factors about social media profiles, such as their captions,

32 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 31 influence how they are perceived by others. Much research has examined the role of attractiveness in social perception, but less research has looked at the roles of gender and confidence, and how they might interact. Given that social media is a growing platform for individuals to portray themselves to others, it is important to look at how and why individuals display themselves the way they do, and to examine how others see them, in order to encourage individuals to us social media in a positive healthy way, that will be accurately perceived by those who view their profiles.

33 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 32 References Back, M. D., Stopfer, J. M., Vazire, S., Gaddis, S., Schmukle, S. C., Egloff, B., et al. (2010). Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychological Science, 21, doi: / Baumeister, R. F., Campbell, J. D., Krueger, J. I., & Vohs, K. D. (2003). Does high self-esteem cause better performance, interpersonal success, happiness, or heathier lifestyles? Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4, doi: / Bem, D. L. (1972). Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 1-62). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Bogart, L. M., Benotsch, E. G., & Pavlovic, J. D. P. (2004). Feeling superior but threatened: The relation of narcissism to social comparison. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26, doi: /s basp2601_4 Braun, C., Gruendl, M., Marberger, C., & Scherber, C. (2001a). Unsexy female face. Retrieved from eauty_mi_zensiert.pdf Braun, C., Gruendl, M., Marberger, C., & Scherber, C. (2001b). Unsexy male face. Retrieved from eauty_mi_zensiert.pdf Buffardi, L. E., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Narcissism and social networking web sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, doi: /

34 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 33 Campbell, W. K. (1999). Narcissism and romantic attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, doi: / Campbell, W. K., & Foster, J. D. (2007). The narcissistic self: Background, an extended agency model, and ongoing controversies. In C. Sedikides & S. J. Spencer (Eds.), The Self: Frontiers of Social Psychology (pp ). New York: Psychology Press. Davenport, S. W., Bergman, S. M., Bergman, J. Z., & Fearrington, M. E. (2014). Twitter versus Facebook: Exploring the role of narcissism in the motives and usage of different social media platforms. Computers in Human Behaviour, 32, doi: /j.chb DeBruine L., & Jones, B. (2010a). Average female face. Retrieved from DeBruine, L., & Jones, B. (2010b). Average male face. Retrieved from Emmons, R. A. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the narcissistic personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, doi: /s jpa4803_11 Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, doi: / Jackson, T. (2007). Protective self-presentation, sources of socialization, and loneliness among Australian adolescents and young adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, doi: /j.paid

35 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 34 John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, doi: /94/$3.00 Kapidzic, S. (2013). Narcissism as a predictor of motivations behind Facebook profile picture selection. Cyberpsychology, Behaviour, and Social Networking, 16, doi: /cyber Kauten, R. L., Lui, J. H. L., Stary, A. K., & Barry, C. T. (2015). Purging my friends list. Good luck making the cut : Perceptions of narcissism on Facebook. Computers in Human Behaviour, 51, doi: /j.chb Kramer, N. C., & Winter, S. (2008). Impression management 2.0: The relationship of selfesteem, extraversion, self-efficacy, and self-presentation within social networking sites. Journal of Media Psychology, 20, doi: / Laghi, F., Pallini, S., D Alessio, M., & Baiocco, R. (2011). Development and validation of the efficacious self-presentation scale. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 172, doi: / Lee, E., Ahn, J., & Kim, Y. J. (2014). Personality traits and self-presentation at Facebook. Personality and Individual Differences, 69, doi: /j.aid Lee, S., Quigley, B. M., Nesler, M. S., Corbet, A. B., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1999). Development of a self-presentation tactics scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, doi: /s (98) Lucker, G. W., Beane, W. E., & Helmreich, R. L. (1981). The strength of the halo effect in physical attractiveness research. The Journal of Psychology, 107, doi: /

36 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 35 McLeod, L. E. (2011). Self-enhancing bias: Why so many people won t acknowledge external factors in their success. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from Morf, C. C., & Rhodewalt, F. (2001). Unraveling the paradoxes of narcissism: A dynamic selfregulatory processing model. Psychological Inquiry, 12, doi: /s pli1204_1 Ong, E. Y. L., Ang, R. P., Ho, J. C. M., Lim, J. C. Y., Goh, D. H., Lee, C. S., & Chua, A. Y. K. (2011). Narcissism, extraversion and adolescents self-presentation on Facebook. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, doi: /j.paid Raskin, R., & Novacek, J. (1991). Narcissism and the use of fantasy. Journal of Clincial Psychology, 47, doi: / (199107)47:<490::aid- JCLP >3.0.CO;2-J Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the Adolescent Self-Image. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Rosenthal, S. (2005). The fine line between confidence and arrogance: Investigating the relationship of self-esteem to narcissism (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No ) Self-confidence. (2016). In Merriam-Webster s online dictionary (11 th ed.). Retrieved from Strano, M. M. (2008). User descriptions and interpretations of self-presentation through Facebook profile images. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 2(2). Retrieved from

37 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 36 Tempesta, E. (2016a). Calvin Klein male ideal mode. Retrieved from pokesmodels-results-near-identical.html Tempesta, E. (2016b). Victoria s Secret ideal model. Retrieved from pokesmodels-results-near-identical.html Utz, S., Tanis, M., & Vermeulen, I. (2012). It is all about being popular: The effects of need for popularity on social network site use. Cyberpsychology, Behaviour, and Social Networking, 15, doi: /cyber Webster, J. M., Hoogland, C. E., Schurtz, D. R., & Smith, R. H. (2014). Excessive image concern and willingness to incur personal cost in the experience and perception of vanity. Self and Identity, 13, doi: / Workman, J. E., & Lee, S-H. (2011). Vanity and public self-consciousness: A comparison of fashion consumer groups and gender. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 35, doi: /j x Zhang, Y., Kong, F., Zhong, Y., & Kou, H. (2014). Personality manipulations: Do they modulate facial attractiveness ratings? Personality and Individual Differences, 70, doi: /j.paid

38 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 37 Appendix A Low Confidence Confident Highly Confident Arrogant Do you know what it s like to wake up in the morning and just dislike yourself? I know everything will be okay. Nobody can bring me down. I ll show you I can do what you think I can t. I have so much wrong with me, it s unbelievable. When someone says they like me, I just assume it s a cruel joke. I suck at everything I do. I feel good about who I am. I have as much brightness to light up the world as anyone. I may not be perfect, but parts of me are pretty awesome. I m extremely talented at what I do. Not one drop of my self-worth depends on your acceptance of me. One of a kind there will never be another me! Ready for the camera, every single time. If like to look at myself in the mirror. Don t act like you aren t impressed. The only thing better looking than you is me.

39 SOCIAL MEDIA PERCEPTIONS 38 Appendix B DIRECTIONS: Please rate the following statements: 1. In general, how favourably do you view this person? Extremely Favourably Neutral Unfavourably Extremely Favourably Unfavourably 2. I would like to meet this person Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree 3. What is this person s attractiveness level? Extremely Low Low Average High Extremely High 4. What level of self-confidence does the statement show this person has? Extremely Low Low Average High Extremely High 5. I would like to be a friend of this person Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree 6. How socially well-adjusted would you estimate this person to be? Extremely Well Well Average Unwell Extremely Unwell